the D+ draft

[CubbiesFan07]

if getting to the superbowl was a foundation to build on winning the sb it would then have some meaning. being a fluke or a one shot wonder is just that.

 

Hey negative nancy, let's pretend to be the Raiders in 2006. I bet we would have had a much better time watching a team lose almost every game instead of cheer our own team on to the SB. It wasn't a fluke, it was a team effort to get there. Let's just say the Patriots are worthless now after going undefeated and losing the SB, yes they obviously are a terrible team because they can't go all the way ...

 

My God, I'd much rather watch my team win all season and at least have a chance to win a SB than to sit back and watch them lose every week.

 

You might as well be a Dolphins fan.

 

Go Bears

 

Fluke, one shot wonder? 2001 would be a better year to call a fluke. We were 5-11 in 2000 and 4-12 in 2002.

 

In 2005 we won the Division, then in 2006 we won the NFC. How is that a fluke? That seems like progress to me. Then in 2007 we take a step back like so many other teams have done after losing the Super Bowl. The good thing is most teams rebound the following year, which we should as well.

 

Actually the ultimate goal is to win the SB, but teams are built to make the playoffs. It is a new season at that point. The Giants barely made the playoffs, yet they won the SB.

 

^^ Sums it up pretty much 100% imho

[Connorbear]

It must suck to that pissed off all the time.

Down goes Frazier!!!!!

 

Peace

[SoxFan1]

i gave not only this draft a D+ but angelo's history of drafting in chicago as a GM a D as a whole.

I stopped reading after this.

 

Devin Hester

Greg Olsen

Alex Brown

Tommie Harris

Lance Briggs

Hunter Hillenmeyer

Charles Tillman

Nathan Vasher

Brandon McGowan

Danieal Manning

 

Jerry Angelo drafted all those guys. There are quite a few Pro Bowls in there. And there is also a Super Bowl appearance.

[Connorbear]

I stopped reading after this.

 

Devin Hester

Greg Olsen

Alex Brown

Tommie Harris

Lance Briggs

Hunter Hillenmeyer

Charles Tillman

Nathan Vasher

Brandon McGowan

Danieal Manning

 

Jerry Angelo drafted all those guys. There are quite a few Pro Bowls in there. And there is also a Super Bowl appearance.

Some slight corrections. Hillenmeyer was drafted by the Pack but cut after the first few weeks of the season. Angelo picked him up. McGowan was an undrafted FA (along with Gould). Plus, you missed Berrian (who was good enough to get large cash in FA), McBride, and AP.

 

BTW - I wouldn't be necessarily mention Manning as a success story for JA.

 

The problem is most of these are on defense. He needs to show he can have success on offense or we need to make a change.

 

Peace

[nfoligno]

So if we draft Woodson in the 6th, that makes the draft a success?

 

Success? No. But I think most who have questions would then at feel an element of logic missing would have been filled in. I believe that if we had drafted Woodson in the 6th, the comments would have been that we passed on Brohm, Henne, and the others because we liked Woodson equal or better. They would talk about how we got a QB we graded close to Brohm, but got him in the 6th rather than Brohm in the 2nd.

 

I am not saying Woodson is shit. I simply believe most expected us to take a Qb, and when we passed on Brohm/Henne, I believe most felt we must have felt one of the other QBs were nearly as good. When we passed on all the QB, then people just didn't know what the hell was going on.

[Zod]

nothing like a well thought out intelligent reply.

 

good job.

 

Hey I'm no internet tough guy. I was born with a mental defect and I'm on adderall and anti-psychotics. I'm lucky to be able to raed corectz.

 

There are days when I wish wasn't beaten with a two by four. Eh, what's mental patient to do?

[Mongo3451]

I stopped reading after this.

Devin Hester

Greg Olsen

Alex Brown

Tommie Harris

Lance Briggs

Hunter Hillenmeyer

Charles Tillman

Nathan Vasher

Brandon McGowan

Danieal Manning

 

Jerry Angelo drafted all those guys. There are quite a few Pro Bowls in there. And there is also a Super Bowl appearance.

He didn't draft all of the, but he was responsible for their presence. Don't forget Gould and Ogun were damn good pickups.

[adam]

Success? No. But I think most who have questions would then at feel an element of logic missing would have been filled in. I believe that if we had drafted Woodson in the 6th, the comments would have been that we passed on Brohm, Henne, and the others because we liked Woodson equal or better. They would talk about how we got a QB we graded close to Brohm, but got him in the 6th rather than Brohm in the 2nd.

 

I am not saying Woodson is shit. I simply believe most expected us to take a Qb, and when we passed on Brohm/Henne, I believe most felt we must have felt one of the other QBs were nearly as good. When we passed on all the QB, then people just didn't know what the hell was going on.

 

True, and I am all for that. We haven't seen the plan to address QB. Picking up some UDFA's is not an answer. Since we didn't draft one, there needs to be a play for someone after the June 1 cuts, or a trade prior to the season.

[nfoligno]

True, and I am all for that. We haven't seen the plan to address QB. Picking up some UDFA's is not an answer. Since we didn't draft one, there needs to be a play for someone after the June 1 cuts, or a trade prior to the season.

 

Thinking about it a bit more, I would like to add this. If Angelo drafted a QB later in the draft, the rationale would have been he liked that QB better. By not drafting a QB at all, I think it creates a perception/question that he didn't view QB as a need. I realize full well his argument is our staff didn't like any of the QBs. This was not a great class, but to argue none were any good is, at least IMHO, a bit of a stretch. Thus, I think, despite Angelo's rationale, there is a legit perception Angelo simply did not want to add a rookie QB, choosing to simply put his faith on final year in Rex/Orton. That makes me sick, but how I see it.

 

As for what to do now, I just do not know that we do much of anything. If the two UDFAs are crap, maybe. But most fans were prepared to draft a QB who would be unlikely to play this year, so I don't see a differce (in terms of 53 man roster) between keeping Woodson as our 3rd QB and one of the UDFAs.

 

Everyone talks about getting his player or that player cut by TB or another team. My question is, why? What is the point. Say TB cuts Simms or McCown. What is the point of their being our #3 QB? This year is all about Rex and/or Orton. If we need to go to our 3rd QB, the season is likely done, so what is the point of a veteran 3rd QB at that point.

 

The UDFAs are not the level I wanted, but I don't see why we would add a veteran, rather than simply let a rookie ride it out as our #3 QB this year.

[nfoligno]

He didn't draft all of the, but he was responsible for their presence. Don't forget Gould and Ogun were damn good pickups.

 

Yes, but there are different issues here.

 

I would argue adding undrafted rookie FAs is equal to the draft. You are going 100% of your college scouting reports.

 

Picking up a player off another teams waivers, signing a veteran FA, or trading for a veteran. Those I think are totally different. Sure, you give Angelo credit for those moves, but if the question is how well Angelo does in the draft, I do not believe you can look at those areas.

[azbearsfan]

Thinking about it a bit more, I would like to add this. If Angelo drafted a QB later in the draft, the rationale would have been he liked that QB better. By not drafting a QB at all, I think it creates a perception/question that he didn't view QB as a need. I realize full well his argument is our staff didn't like any of the QBs. This was not a great class, but to argue none were any good is, at least IMHO, a bit of a stretch. Thus, I think, despite Angelo's rationale, there is a legit perception Angelo simply did not want to add a rookie QB, choosing to simply put his faith on final year in Rex/Orton. That makes me sick, but how I see it.

 

As for what to do now, I just do not know that we do much of anything. If the two UDFAs are crap, maybe. But most fans were prepared to draft a QB who would be unlikely to play this year, so I don't see a differce (in terms of 53 man roster) between keeping Woodson as our 3rd QB and one of the UDFAs.

 

Everyone talks about getting his player or that player cut by TB or another team. My question is, why? What is the point. Say TB cuts Simms or McCown. What is the point of their being our #3 QB? This year is all about Rex and/or Orton. If we need to go to our 3rd QB, the season is likely done, so what is the point of a veteran 3rd QB at that point.

 

The UDFAs are not the level I wanted, but I don't see why we would add a veteran, rather than simply let a rookie ride it out as our #3 QB this year.

 

 

I think something that also could have played into JA is that I read here that he brought both of those guys in for a visit. He must have liked them when they met and was betting that noone would take them. The crappy QB situation we have here actually helped get those guys signed because from their perspective they have a better shot at making the team and/or playing. So we get a couple of guys who could have mid round ratings for money without wasting picks on them.

 

I'm really interested to see these guys play in pre-season.

[nfoligno]

I think something that also could have played into JA is that I read here that he brought both of those guys in for a visit. He must have liked them when they met and was betting that noone would take them. The crappy QB situation we have here actually helped get those guys signed because from their perspective they have a better shot at making the team and/or playing. So we get a couple of guys who could have mid round ratings for money without wasting picks on them.

 

I'm really interested to see these guys play in pre-season.

 

That's great. I am simply not getting my hopes up. While there have been exceptions to the rule, the odds of a rookie FA not only making the team, but becoming a starting QB (much less franchise) is ridiculously small. Yes, everyone is talking about Romo, just as everyone started talking about Brady in the 6th, but while those two prove anything is possible, possible and likely still are two light years apart.

[azbearsfan]

That's great. I am simply not getting my hopes up. While there have been exceptions to the rule, the odds of a rookie FA not only making the team, but becoming a starting QB (much less franchise) is ridiculously small. Yes, everyone is talking about Romo, just as everyone started talking about Brady in the 6th, but while those two prove anything is possible, possible and likely still are two light years apart.

 

 

I agree with the point that we should not get our hopes up, but I am looking optimisticly at the situation. The more research I do on those guys the better I feel.

 

 

I do wonder how different the reaction to our draft would have been if we take one of the qb's with our 5th rnd pick.

 

What's your take nfo? Would people have graded us better and taken Hill or HAnie more seriously?

[nfoligno]

I agree with the point that we should not get our hopes up, but I am looking optimisticly at the situation. The more research I do on those guys the better I feel.

 

 

I do wonder how different the reaction to our draft would have been if we take one of the qb's with our 5th rnd pick.

 

What's your take nfo? Would people have graded us better and taken Hill or HAnie more seriously?

 

Whether people believe it or not, I love optimism. Problem is, while I like optimism, I can't help but to be a realist. The more you read about a player, the more you fall in love w/ their potential. That is always the case. If you go off what fans believe, Hass should already be looking for a spot to put his bust in the HOF.

 

Now, as to your question. Are you asking how people would talk about our draft had we drafted Haine or Hill in the 5th? I think we would have been ridiculed for it to be honest. They were considered, from what I can tell, as 7th rounders or UDFAs, which is how we got them. If we took them in the 5th, I think we would have been ripped for reaching, not to mention comments would have been made about who we drafted ahead of them.

 

I have talked about this before, but if you want my opinion of how we could have really jacked up our hype

 

1st - Williams - No problem here.

2nd - Forte - Staff felt it was a key need

2nd - Brohm - We give up our 4th (which is what the value chart would say) to move up from the early 3rd to get our QB

3rd - Caldwell - I like Bennett, but I think Caldwell would have been a well received WR too, and is similar in many ways.

 

If that was our first 3 rounds, I think our draft grade and hype would have soared. It would have shown Angelo being truly committed to building the offense, both current and future, and not putting all his eggs in the same broken basket (orton/rex)

[Lucky Luciano]

Ok so I'll drop the Forte discussion.

 

I agree our offense has been very bad during that time. Would you not agree, however, that our defense has been very good during that time?

 

Peace

 

yes i will agree we have had a good defense. the problem is that it's just not enough by a longshot to field half a team in todays modern football era. the game has moved on, it's transformed into a media fest of offense. they have changed the rules to fit what they want to sell advertising with.... basketball scores.

 

so... my rating of angelo stands at a mark of D. if he were a defensive talent evaluator or head scout in the area of defense then ok. but he is not. he is the general manager, the guy who makes 95% or more of all football decisions determining who is going to play ON the field. if you can't evaluate, or find someone who CAN evaluate, talent on both sides of the ball you have no business collecting a gm's paycheck.

 

if there ever was a time when offense wasn't the determining factor on how many world championships your franchise would win it is long, long past. a GM HAS to be able to see what the future in football is and adjust his team to fit it or get out.

[Lucky Luciano]

I wouldn't be surprised at all if we make it back to the Super Bowl this year (nor would I if we don't). It would take Rex or Kyle finding themselves and Url not being injured (as well as a lack of injuries in gerneral of course). Nagging injuries to the OL hurt us last year so it's not inconceivable that even without our new #1 draft pick our OL could be much improved. These days, unless you are the NE Pats, having a good record the year before is not a prerequisite to getting to the Super Bowl. We've certainly got some talent: Url, Briggs, Vasher, Tillman, Tommie, Dusty, Wale, Mark Anderson, Alex & Mike Brown, Hester, Greg Olson, Gould, Maynard. Look around the league. Other teams are not as well off compared to the Bears as some of you seem to think. Oh, it'll also take a better year from Babich and Turner. We were legitimately better than every NFC team 2 years ago. It wasn't a fluke.

 

every player you mentioned as talent, besides special teams and a tight end we drafted last year and who has hardly played, is on defense.

[Lucky Luciano]

Fluke, one shot wonder? 2001 would be a better year to call a fluke. We were 5-11 in 2000 and 4-12 in 2002.

 

In 2005 we won the Division, then in 2006 we won the NFC. How is that a fluke? That seems like progress to me. Then in 2007 we take a step back like so many other teams have done after losing the Super Bowl. The good thing is most teams rebound the following year, which we should as well.

 

Actually the ultimate goal is to win the SB, but teams are built to make the playoffs. It is a new season at that point. The Giants barely made the playoffs, yet they won the SB.

 

progress? it's the same progress we had after 1985!! the only difference is we looked like fools in a superbowl. to me that is not progress when half of your team is setting records that the worst offense in the NFL for decades (us) had set previously.

 

you can't just look at improvement on half of your team and say we are on the road to recovery while the other half looks worse than a semi pro team with NO relief in sight.

[Lucky Luciano]

About the only two guards in this draft that could come in and start would have been Albert and maybe Rachal. St. Clair came in at the end of the season and looked pretty good especially since he had his mind set at being a back up RT or LT. St. Clair is a good player and teammate and if he can be a starting caliber G in the NFL, why not give him his shot at being a starter in the NFL. Last year we drafted Beekman in the 4th. He was considered the 3-5 best guard in last years draft. Rusty/the Bears wanted him to strengthen up a year before putting him in as most teams do with lower drafted offensive linemen. Beekman is still a highly touted G, we still need another prospect I definately agree, but the dire need of the team was still OLT, WR, and RB.

 

As for drafting McGlynn, if you remember he was sitting right there for the Bears, but the Eagles traded up and took him right before the Bears. They were very high on McGlynn and whose to say they wouldn't have taken him. After he was gone, thats when the Bears traded down twice to gain more picks.

 

As for WR's, I love the pick of Bennett and will be the first to buy his jersey when it hits the shelfs. He's not the homerun threat, but we have that in Hester and Bradley who have speed. Bennett is said to be in the mold of Hines Ward and if he becomes that type of receiver, I think every Bear fan will be thrilled with that pick in the third round.

 

let me put this into perspective... st. clair is a 30 year old utility tackle and he does it pretty well. i like the guy but i also realize he is probably not ever going to be a pro-bowl tackle or guard. he is what he is and 5 will get ya 10 he would never start on any team with a reasonably good offense. we need young talent to start grooming to take over, if not this year, certainly next year or the year after. we just can't keep on bringing in expensive free agents. it's a fail, fail proposition.

 

i have to point this out: look at our entire offense and tell me how many starters are on our roster that angelo drafted. not a SINGLE offensive lineman. TE dez clark is slotted to be the starter with a possibility of our no-brainer TE he drafted last season to fight for that spot. booker is probably our #1 WR along with davis as #2 or #3 and the rest are a crapshoot that he did draft.

 

that leaves our duo of quarterbacks that he drafted and not a single person on earth knows what good they are. they certainly don't look like franchise qb's to me at this point. course we will probably never know what orton can or can't do anyway the way they never play him.

 

now you might say... but what about all the guards we have on the roster? what about beekman, jones, oakley ect. if any of these guys can't beat out a one armed guard on the last string of his career it's criminal that angelo would have drafted or aquired them on this roster.

 

if it's not his fault and these are quality players, then it has to be that our coaching staff is so inept they can't even get something as simple as replacing an injured guard right and it STILL falls on angelo for hiring complete incompitants!!!!!!!

[GrizzlyBear]

I gave em an overall B+, Solid draft with everything they needed secured in the draft and some options outside in FA, Nice going JA.

[Lucky Luciano]

Hey negative nancy, let's pretend to be the Raiders in 2006. I bet we would have had a much better time watching a team lose almost every game instead of cheer our own team on to the SB. It wasn't a fluke, it was a team effort to get there. Let's just say the Patriots are worthless now after going undefeated and losing the SB, yes they obviously are a terrible team because they can't go all the way ...

 

My God, I'd much rather watch my team win all season and at least have a chance to win a SB than to sit back and watch them lose every week.

 

You might as well be a Dolphins fan.

 

Go Bears

 

 

 

^^ Sums it up pretty much 100% imho

 

negative nancy? uhhhhh yea ok whatever.

 

and pretending we are the raiders of 2006? huh?

 

a fluke is the ravens ONLY superbowl (and at least that was a win) in 2000 and no joy for 8 years after that. the bears in 85 and ONE sb win in it's entire history. that is a fluke and when 22 years later you tout the worst offense in the history of the nfl a year after you LOSE it, it says it all.

 

you can call the pats anything you want but i'd look at their record over the last 22 years before i did.

 

i watched my team win all season during the 80's and it truly doesn't mean jack $%!& without the ring.

 

and a dolphin fan? from raiders to dolphins? spoken like a true cub fan.

[Lucky Luciano]

I stopped reading after this.

 

Devin Hester

Greg Olsen

Alex Brown

Tommie Harris

Lance Briggs

Hunter Hillenmeyer

Charles Tillman

Nathan Vasher

Brandon McGowan

Danieal Manning

 

Jerry Angelo drafted all those guys. There are quite a few Pro Bowls in there. And there is also a Super Bowl appearance.

 

name every offensive player in a pro bowl angie drafted and THEN read on...